Zappos Is Getting Rid Of All Job Titles And Managers, But Some Bosses Will Still Decide Who Gets Paid Whathttp://www.businessinsider.com/bosses-in-zappos-holacracy-2014-1/comments
en-usWed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500Sun, 02 Aug 2015 17:08:49 -0400Jim Edwardshttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c7411f6bb3f7162e0e77d3Olivier CompagneFri, 03 Jan 2014 18:00:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c7411f6bb3f7162e0e77d3
Luckily you don't have to take my word for it. Just follow the link and check the facts.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c71f3feab8ea5d690e77cdI call BSFri, 03 Jan 2014 15:36:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c71f3feab8ea5d690e77cd
Thanks Oliver. Glad to see that someone who works for the company responsible for rolling out in other orgs standing up....real objective.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c60f88eab8ea072cbd3b65Olivier CompagneThu, 02 Jan 2014 20:16:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c60f88eab8ea072cbd3b65
That's inaccurate. Holacracy provides *very* clear accountabilities: <a href="http://holacracy.org/blog/rule-of-law-property-rights-in-organizations" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >http://holacracy.org/blog/rule-of-law-property-rights-in-organizations</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c5f5d56bb3f71726d842c3Digital PantsThu, 02 Jan 2014 18:27:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c5f5d56bb3f71726d842c3
Total Utopian bullshit. Just another form of a matrix management structure. This nonsense never works because there is no way to have real responsibility or accountability. You can count on two things here: 1. Tony gets more free press fawning over what a management genius he supposedly is. And 2: A year from now this new organizational approach will be scrapped without any word to the press.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c5c265ecad04fa52a579f6Olivier CompagneThu, 02 Jan 2014 14:47:49 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c5c265ecad04fa52a579f6
I work with HolacracyOne, the company behind Holacracy. Glad to see the misconception corrected about Holacracy – it is not a "flat" structure. However, it's not a hierarchy of people as you know it; it's a little more subtle than that. Holacracy clearly differentiates people from the *roles* of the organization. There are still roles – in fact, roles are very clearly defined with Holacracy. You can see an example with HolacracyOne's structure, which is public (Zappos' isn't public): <a href="https://glassfrog.holacracy.org/organizations/5" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >https://glassfrog.holacracy.org/organizations/5</a> . Roles have a clear purpose and clear accountabilities. So it's true that a role may have the authority to decide salaries, or that another role might have the authority to hire and fire. Authority is distributed to roles throughout the company.
The big difference with typical management is that with Holacracy, once you have a role with the accountability for, say, selecting the venue for events, then nobody (e.g. a "boss") can trump your decision if they feel like it. You have *real* authority, and you decide how you get your work done. No micromanagement allowed.
Another big difference is that people can have several roles! If you look at HolacracyOne's structure again ( <a href="https://glassfrog.holacracy.org/organizations/5" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >https://glassfrog.holacracy.org/organizations/5</a> ), you can see that we have much more roles and circles than we have partners in the company. That's because each partner fills several roles (sometimes up to 30 roles! Although I suspect it might be less for larger companies), and so although there is a hierarchy (more accurately - a holarchy) of circles and roles, it doesn't map to a hierarchy of people. In one circle/team, I might have the "Website Director" role and I decide what goes on the website – you could say I'm kind of the boss of the website, in a way – and in another role, I am making Powerpoint sides at the request of other roles, and I do as they ask – in this other context, they are the boss of my role, in a way. All that to say, the question "is there a hierarchy or is there not?" isn't as meaningful with Holacracy. Things are just different.
The last point I'll make about roles is that they evolve continually – it's the whole point of Holacracy. There is a process to update the roles' accountabilities in real time, based on feedback from doing the work. It's another topic that I won't develop here, but I find it important to mention.
You can read more in this blog post about what happens to CEOs and managers when the company adopts Holacracy <a href="https://medium.com/p/9db3c361bd26" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >https://medium.com/p/9db3c361bd26</a>
Lastly, if you wanna learn more, we give a free intro webinar on Jan 9 and other intro events: <a href="http://holacracy.org/events" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >http://holacracy.org/events</a> (if it's full when you get there, we'll open another one soon)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c59b976bb3f7af73d842b9So it's really a communist companyThu, 02 Jan 2014 12:02:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c59b976bb3f7af73d842b9
One guy calls the shots. A small cadre of associates make the administrative decisions and they profit from the work produced by a mass of anonymous laborers.
Only an idiot or a desperate comrade would work in these conditions.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c59640ecad04ec76a57a0bLodgeIckThu, 02 Jan 2014 11:39:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/52c59640ecad04ec76a57a0b
There is no need for such an org. Its a game for a guy who has too much money and gets far too much attention from the press. Tony is not a genius, he's just opportunistic.